Ms. A is obviously passionate in her critiques of *** companies, especially as it regards their relationships with ***, universities, and other components of the *** industry. I feel that many of her hypotheses, especially regarding *** control over the dissemination of *** information, are fairly accurate. Nonetheless, Ms. A’s perspective, in my opinion, is quite provincial; she does not (or will not) recognize the many benefits that accrue to Americans from these relationships. I have no doubt that some of her solutions to these problems would be worse than the current status-quo.
Regardless of the merits of her beliefs, Ms. A has an unquestioned right to express them and to solicit funds to further her causes. Ms. A is one of tens of thousands (or perhaps hundreds of thousands) of Americans, on both the right and the left, who actively espouse radical positions. These individuals, and the organizations they run, have been a fixture in the U.S. for centuries. Most experts would likely contend that they benefit discourse on key subjects by forcing Americans to countenance a more cosmopolitan view of these issues, be it pharmacy-doctor interactions or some other topic, than they would otherwise do. Further, extremists have been successful in bringing attention to otherwise overlooked societal problems. For instance, would the U.S. have banned DDT if environmentalists, such as Rachel Carson, had not brought the issue to the fore?